- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:55:05 -0700
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org>, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > I think what you are saying is that you want to write an algorithm > which walks over unicode code points rather than UTF16 encoded data. > And that that algorithm is triggered by a function call where you'd > like to use this new type. > > Is that correct? > > If so, I think you can simply express your algorithm as iterating > Unicode data. No need to do that in the WebIDL step. The point of having the type is to avoid having to reference the algorithm IDL defines for this, as I wrote in my email where I pointed out this problem with [EnsureUTF16]. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 29 July 2013 04:55:32 UTC